Jump to content

IT Support Services = FAR 39 or FAR 37?


Recommended Posts

The definition of IT under FAR 2.1 includes "support services". However, based on my experience, support services have typically been procured as professional (advisory/assistance) services under FAR part 37. As such, federal agencies have normally limited their options to restrict the length of these "service" contracts to 5 years or less. However, based on FAR 17.204(e), it would appear that IT support services are exempt from this restriction. So is there any limitation on the lengths of contracts for IT support services?

Also I'm finding federal agencies that are procuring, on a sole source basis, numerous multi-million dollar IT support services as 'commercial items' thereby eliminating the applicability of CAS and prohibiting the requirement for certification of C/P data. I'm a little concerned that IT support services are being treated so differently from other professional support services and are thereby being exempted from mechanisms that I see as critical to ensuring the Govt. obtains fair and reasonable prices. How does the Govt. determine when support services should be procured under FAR 37 vs. FAR 39? It is simply the use of the word IT in the SOW that exempts these contracts from the limitations placed on other support services?

I'd appreciate any insight I can get on these issues.

Thanks in advance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not following the point you are trying to make. Note that FAR 17.204(e) specifies IT services and not just IT support services. So the five year limit applies to IT contracts in general.

(e) Unless otherwise approved in accordance with agency procedures, the total of the basic and option periods shall not exceed 5 years in the case of services, and the total of the basic and option quantities shall not exceed the requirement for 5 years in the case of supplies. These limitations do not apply to information technology contracts. However, statutes applicable to various classes of contracts, for example, the Service Contract Act (see 22.1002-1), may place additional restrictions on the length of contracts
.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How does the Govt. determine when support services should be procured under FAR 37 vs. FAR 39? It is simply the use of the word IT in the SOW that exempts these contracts from the limitations placed on other support services?

You seem to be implying that FAR Parts 37 and 39 are mutually exclusive, and they're not. If you're procuring IT support services, you should follow both Part 39 and Part 37. Have you found a conflict between the two?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So am I not interpretting this reg incorrectly? I'm reading FAR to say that the 5 year limitations do NOT apply to IT contracts whereas you're saying they do. So is your response based on the assumption that the IT "support service" contract includes 1 or more positions that are included in DOL's SCA Directory of Occupations per FAR 22.1002-1? And if so, I agree but it still begs the question as to what limit, if any, is placed on IT contracts in general that are NOT subject to the SCA? Are there other statutes, besides the SCA, that could place limits on an IT contracts that I need to be aware of? I admit that I am new to the IT procurement arena. So I can use all the help I can get to make sense of this.

GSA provides professional IT support services on schedule. From what I can tell, it appears that GSA can award schedule contracts for a period of up to 20 years (base 5-year period with allowance to exercise 5-year option periods no more than 3 times) under the authority of GSA's I-FSS-163 clause. So is that my answer? If professional IT support services are available on GSA schedule, then can the length of a non-schedule IT contract equal that of GSA's FAS/FSS schedules even though the clause that grants that authority only applies to GSA FSS schedule contracts?

But that does bring up another question. Which Options clause in FAR pertains to the procurement of stand-alone professional IT support services that do not contain positions subject to the SCA? Typically the clause at FAR 52.217-9 and -8 are incorporated into contracts for support services that include positions that are subject to the SCA to align with FAR 22.1006-2©(1) FLSA clauses permitting "price adjustment" when exercising options for service contracts. But if procurement of professional IT support services does not include any positions subject to SCA, is it considered "other than those for services" (even though the word "services" is included in the contract title for "support SERVICES") thereby requiring the use of either FAR 52.217-6 or FAR 52.217-7 instead? If IT professional support services are available on GSA schedule, then I have to assume that it is being considered a "supply"/ "other than those for services" contract thereby requiring inclusion of one of the "increased quantity" option clauses rather than the service option clauses (which seems to make sense to me because the 'price adjustment' FLSA clauses would not apply). Does that sound reasonable?

I think it's the mere use of the word "services" in the contract title for IT support services that is muddying the situation for me. But based on this research, I'm beginning to think that my agency has been wrong all these years in including the service option clauses 52.217-8 and -9 on other (including non-IT) professional service contracts where the SCA did not apply. It appears that we should have been using the supply option clauses instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards
So am I not interpretting this reg incorrectly? I'm reading FAR to say that the 5 year limitations do NOT apply to IT contracts whereas you're saying they do. So is your response based on the assumption that the IT "support service" contract includes 1 or more positions that are included in DOL's SCA Directory of Occupations per FAR 22.1002-1? And if so, I agree but it still begs the question as to what limit, if any, is placed on IT contracts in general that are NOT subject to the SCA? Are there other statutes, besides the SCA, that could place limits on an IT contracts that I need to be aware of? I admit that I am new to the IT procurement arena. So I can use all the help I can get to make sense of this.

GSA provides professional IT support services on schedule. From what I can tell, it appears that GSA can award schedule contracts for a period of up to 20 years (base 5-year period with allowance to exercise 5-year option periods no more than 3 times) under the authority of GSA's I-FSS-163 clause. So is that my answer? If professional IT support services are available on GSA schedule, then can the length of a non-schedule IT contract equal that of GSA's FAS/FSS schedules even though the clause that grants that authority only applies to GSA FSS schedule contracts?

But that does bring up another question. Which Options clause in FAR pertains to the procurement of stand-alone professional IT support services that do not contain positions subject to the SCA? Typically the clause at FAR 52.217-9 and -8 are incorporated into contracts for support services that include positions that are subject to the SCA to align with FAR 22.1006-2?(1) FLSA clauses permitting "price adjustment" when exercising options for service contracts. But if procurement of professional IT support services does not include any positions subject to SCA, is it considered "other than those for services" (even though the word "services" is included in the contract title for "support SERVICES") thereby requiring the use of either FAR 52.217-6 or FAR 52.217-7 instead? If IT professional support services are available on GSA schedule, then I have to assume that it is being considered a "supply"/ "other than those for services" contract thereby requiring inclusion of one of the "increased quantity" option clauses rather than the service option clauses (which seems to make sense to me because the 'price adjustment' FLSA clauses would not apply). Does that sound reasonable?

I think it's the mere use of the word "services" in the contract title for IT support services that is muddying the situation for me. But based on this research, I'm beginning to think that my agency has been wrong all these years in including the service option clauses 52.217-8 and -9 on other (including non-IT) professional service contracts where the SCA did not apply. It appears that we should have been using the supply option clauses instead.

You have gotten yourself wrapped around the axle. Your post is so confusing that I almost decided to ignore it.

The five-year limitation in FAR 17.204(e) does not, by its express terms, apply to IT support services contracts. The five-year limit in FAR 22.1002-1 does apply if the contract is under the SCA. However, that SCA limitation has been interpreted by the Department of Labor to mean that if the contract is renewable through options, each option starts the five-year clock anew. See 29 CFR 4.145. So, in theory, you can have a service contract to which the SCA applies that goes for one year with 100 one year options.

I know of no other five-year limit that applies to IT support services contracts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...